Bibliography – My Writings on Israel Victory

Ini 1990, I offered a "symmetry plan" for the Palestinian issue based on the idea that "when the Arab states give Israel something it wants, Israelis should then - and only then - be expected to give something in turn to the Palestinians." But this did not happen; rather, the Oslo accords of 1993 ignored the Arab states and focused exclusively on the Palestinians and Israel, making demands almost only of the latter.

Starting in 1997, as the Oslo process unraveled, I developed an alternative approach that reached full formulation by 2001: Not more counterproductive negotiations leading to more Israeli concessions that spur Palestinians hopes to eliminate the Jewish state, but a return to the historic default scenario of despair leading to defeat and peace (think 1865, 1945, 1975, 1989).

I have written often on this topic since then and now, a day ahead of the launch of the Congressional Israel Victory Caucus devoted to promoting these ideas, collect those publications here. (The listing will be updated.)

"On Arab Rejectionism." Commentary, December 1997. A first formulation seeks U.S. support for an Israeli "policy of firmness."

"...Too Bad Their [Israeli] Minds Are Made Up." Forward, December 25, 1998. Holds that eventually "Israelis will realize that ... they must resume their deterrence posture of old. They will have no choice but to stick to the dull but effective policy of making sure that anyone who threatens them pays dearly for his aggressiveness."

[My first talk focused on the subject of Palestinians losing took place for the Detroit chapter of the Zionist Organization of America on March 27, 1999.]

"The Left's Ongoing Oslo Delusion." Jerusalem Post, April 25, 2001. My first full articulation of the Israel Victory idea argues that Israel, "to end its problem with the Palestinians" must "convince Palestinians not of its niceness but its toughness"; raises the parallel with Germany in the two world wars; notes that "Palestinians will not give up on their aggressive ambitions vis-a-vis Israel until fully convinced that these cannot succeed"; points out that Palestinians benefit from losing, as "Only then can they build a polity and an economy commensurate with their dignity and talent"; and concludes that "Palestinians need almost as much to be defeated by Israel as Israel needs to defeat them."

"Preventing War: Israel's Options." Jerusalem Post, July 18, 2001. Argues that "Unless Israel sends clear signals of strength, the current bout of saber-rattling could, 1967-style, lead inadvertently to another all-out war." Offers steps Israel can take to show strength.

"First, Accept Israel." Los Angeles Times, August 31, 2001. Israel's burden "is to be strong and to persevere, until Arabs eventually recognize the futility of rejectionism and give it up."

"Arabs Have Never Accepted Israel. Wall Street Journal Europe, December 3, 2001. "Israel has the unenviable task of convincing its enemies that their dreams of its destruction will fail; translated into action, this means it must show resolve and toughness. ... Such lethal intentions as one finds widely in the Arabic-speaking countries can only be defeated with strength."

"Israel May Be Winning." New York Post, December 17, 2001. An optimistic interpretation of Israeli policies.

"Arabs Still Want to Destroy Israel." Wall Street Journal, January 18, 2002. "Israel now has the unenviable task of convincing the Arabs that their dreams of destruction will fail. Translated into action, that means resolve and toughness. It means becoming feared, not loved."

"Israel is Winning [1]." New York Post, August 6, 2002. Argues that the policies implemented by Ariel Sharon were working.

"Does Israel Need a [Peace] Plan?" Commentary, February 2003. After reviewing the many "peace" plans swirling around in 2002, I give the first detailed explanation of "inducing the Palestinians to surrender their murderous intentions vis-à-vis Israel."

"An Israeli Military Victory?" DanielPipes.org, June 15, 2003. Takes issue with Victor Davis Hanson's argument that all depends on the United States, not Israel.

"Israel Shuns Victory." New York Sun, March 28, 2006. None of the candidates for prime minister in Israel seek victory.

"How Israel Can Win." New York Sun, April 4, 2006. Follows up on the column a week earlier, with further explanations.

The above text may be reposted, forwarded, or translated so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information about its author, date, place of publication, as well as the original URL.

Reader comments (1) on this item

Comment on this item

Name:

Email Address: (optional)

Title of Comments:

Comments:

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".